not the state i would have guess would be next in line, but it sounds like they have some clear-thinking judges:

Quote:

Justices weighed this amendment against the opposition’s argument that prohibiting same-sex marriage was necessary to protect the government’s “overriding interest of responsible procreation and childrearing.”

The justices said in their opinion that such interest played no role in the development of the state’s marriage regulations. Its purpose, they contended, is to “bring stability and order to the legal relationship of committed couples” by defining their responsibilities to one another, as well as their children if they choose to have them, and to their property.

“Procreation,” wrote Justice Edward L. Chavez, author of the opinion, “has never been a condition of marriage under New Mexico law, as evidenced by the fact that the aged, the infertile and those who choose not to have children are not precluded from marrying.”

now if we can only get the rest of the states to understand that really, marriage is not about your responsibility to the state to pump out babies, maybe we can get this finally settled.

well, it's just sensible. that's the only reason the state even cares about marriage, because it's a contract, and the state is ultimately responsible for enforcing contracts._________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

Oh man, the comments on these articles are simply mindfuck worthy. Also, if I had a dollar for every time someone used the term "free speech", I'd be able to pay off the US debt right now._________________Whatever happened to the heroes?

I feel like we need a new class in our high school curriculum where students spend a couple weeks writing "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility for your speech" over and over._________________The older I get, the more certain I become of one thing. True and abiding cynicism is simply a form of cowardice.

As a break from the cries of freedom of speech, I read someone "just saying" that it was interesting that people were outraged over whatshisface's comments, but not over the starving children in Africa.

Honestly, I think 99% of the time if you use the phrase "starving children in Africa" and do not, say, actively work for a charity raising money for said children, you should be slapped. Are people also not allowed to be happy because someone out there is a billionaire swimming in money with a garage full of shiny vintage cars?

First the agents strip-searched the plaintiff, examining her anus and vagina with a flashlight. Finding nothing, they took her to the University Medical Center of El Paso, where they forced her to take a laxative and produce a bowel movement in their presence. Again they found no evidence of contraband. At this point one of their accomplices, a physician named Christopher Cabanillas, ordered an X-ray, which likewise found nothing suspicious. Then the plaintiff "endured a forced gynecological exam" and rectal probing at the hands of another doctor, Michael Parsa. Still nothing. Finally, Cabanillas ordered a CT scan of the plaintiff's abdomen and pelvis, which found no sign of illegal drugs. "After the CT scan," the complaint says, "a CBP [Customs and Border Patrol] agent presented Ms. Doe with a choice: she could either sign a medical consent form, despite the fact that she had not consented, in which case CBP would pay for the cost of the searches; or if she refused to sign the consent form, she would be billed for the cost of the searches." She refused, and later the hospital sent her a bill for $5,000, apparently the going rate for sexual assault and gratuitous radiological bombardment.

(Here's a CBS Local article for those who don't like reason.com, but that headline was too amazing not to use)_________________“Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation”
yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation.

Oh yeah, NDAA FY14 passed with minimal media coverage over the loss of human rights._________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

Melissa Harris-Perry thinks one of Mitt Romney's grandchildren is hilarious.

Uh, it appears they're amused by the possibility of someone having both Kanye West and Mitt Romney as inlaws at the same time.

... How is that mocking the black grandson?

I agree it's in poor taste, mind._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Melissa Harris-Perry thinks one of Mitt Romney's grandchildren is hilarious.

Uh, it appears they're amused by the possibility of someone having both Kanye West and Mitt Romney as inlaws at the same time.

... How is that mocking the black grandson?

MHP: "Any captions for this one?"
guest: "One of these things is not like the other..."

I should note I was going by the article (as I had not had time to watch the video), and they'd only seemed to complain about the JayZ thing.

Yes, that's in bad taste and uncalled for._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger